Thanks for the responses, couple of follow-ups > Why do you need Axis for this?
Well you certainly don't for the SRU implementation, but for SRW I'd just say that (in all the SRW implementations i've done so far) it's a case of the right tool for the right job. Of course we can hand craft the codecs and parse/produce the XML by hand. However, the SRU/SRW community comes from a background of interoperability as a sacrosanct requirement. Given that background, having something parse wsdl and produce your codecs for you gives people (me) a warm fuzzy feeling when it comes to WSI compliance. It also makes the release process much easier when it comes to upgrading the protocol version: Just pop a new wsdl in the build tree and compile. Of course there are other reasons too, but thats a starter for 10 :) > Solr has some pluggable capability, detailed here: Ah ok thanks for that. I've taken a quick look and I'm trying to figure out how we might be able too expose extra features, like the ability to request results be returned in different schemas. I'll keep at it tho and check back if I have any questions. Cheers, Ian. On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 16:35 -0500, Erik Hatcher wrote: > On Nov 20, 2006, at 2:15 PM, Ian Ibbotson wrote: > > Hiya all... > > > > I'm interested in the possibility of contributing SRW/SRU web services > > interface/module to solr (see http://www.loc.gov/standards/sru/). > > SRW/SRU is the web service definition which is often used along- > > side or > > instead-of the more traditional Z39.50 protocol for cross/meta > > searching. a solr SRW/SRU interface would enable meta-search > > engines to > > transparently include solr repository search results by only > > configuring > > the base URL of the service. I've already got the much code to do much > > of whats needed (IE, CQL to Lucene query rewriters and code to > > generate > > the right stubs using axis etc). Actually, I might be up for > > creating a > > z3950 module too if anyone is interested? > > > Why do you need Axis for this? > > > So my first question really would be... Is anyone out there already > > working on such a beast? If so, do you need any help? Seems > > pointless to > > create a second add-on. I've searched the lists (Not in any great > > depth > > tho) and can't see any references to SRW/Z3959. Assuming nobody is, > > I've > > got some follow-up questions about the best way to package up what > > might > > be add-on modules.. is this list the right place to ask? > > Solr has some pluggable capability, detailed here: > > <http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrPlugins> > > You can simply create your code, which I presume would entail a > SolrRequestHandler and a QueryResponseWriter, and distribute it as a > JAR that others could just drop in and run with it. > > Erik >
